docsmiles17 wrote:
IMO, Her complexion is complimented better with a contrasting background (like in last image) vs the blown out background in all the others. I assume you meant to blow out the backgrounds, correct??

I was playing with some lighting since I usually just shoot with natural light. I was attempting to keep her lighted properly while not blowing out the background as much as shown in the photos; all the while keeping her looking naturally lighted. How would you shoot this? Looking for suggestions. thanks

I tend to think all natural or available light is the best way to go but it takes a real knowledge of how to see and work in natural light. Lisa ( she posts here) does if very well.

I love this quote by one of the very best.

"Today's photographers think differently. Many can't see real light anymore. They think only in terms of strobe - sure, it all looks beautiful but it's not really seeing. If you have the eyes to see it, the nuances of light are already there on the subject's face. If your thinking is confined to strobe light sources, your palette becomes very mean - which is the reason I photograph only in available light." - Alfred Eisenstaedt

Well, its hard to tell what direction or where the natural light source is coming from in the images. If I couldn't get the background exposed properly without making subject too dark, I'd do one of two things. Use a flash for fill light or shoot at different time of day

Well, its hard to tell what direction or where the natural light source is coming from in the images. If I couldn't get the background exposed properly without making subject too dark, I'd do one of two things. Use a flash for fill light or shoot at different time of day

This was during sunset, but the skies were solid overcast yet very bright. We had to do what we could. Here’s how I shot it. I used a speedlight with gel lighted from slightly behind and to one side of the model to give some sense of direction (you’ll see some slight golden/yellow highlights). I then used a gold reflector in front/slightly angled. She is very fair skin and even with makeup needed a little more color. This was a test shoot to play with lighting. I wish I would have stopped down a little more to kill more of the ambient. I have a lot to learn about lighting with speedlights, but I believe I’ve learned a few lessons with this session. My other consideration for next time, if in the same situation, will be to add a ND filter so that I can keep a shallow depth of field but reduce the ambient light, and then use lighting to properly expose for the model. She is a classic beauty and a joy to work with. We will be doing more. She was ecstatic with the photos I delivered to her. So scheduling another session should be a no brainer.

By the way, thanks for all of the comments and constructive criticism!

Slightly altering that famous saying: Background, background, background. By shooting against so much white you created a high key type look which, to my eye, creates a distraction from your beautiful model with her fair skin and blonde hair. Bright tones tend to focus our attention. The high key effect can be very nice, don't get me wrong, but, I think it works best when there is a certain shapeliness to the lines and a light texture in the whites. Instead of consciously realized order, we have a sense of randomness to the first four pictures. The blurred buildings are also not contributing to the image, I don't think. My suggestion would be to find a background that offers as few distractions to her as possible. Like the last image. The greens complement her colors with a smooth, monochromatic feel that balances the complexity of her clothing and the fine detail you captured. The red wine introduces a nice, dark element that contrasts nicely with the pastels. Of course, variety is the spice so you don't want to repeat this particular shot. But, I think the principles are sound: the use of opposites to create a complementary relationship between the model and the background in tone, texture, complexity, and color. Notice the use of the rule of thirds in the final image. The line of pink creates a nice low 'horizon' to the image and her hair echoes the frame and cascades along the left thirds line. Nice amount of negative space to her right. The first four lack such composition order to my way of seeing. You don't need to use the third's approach but I would like to see more intentional precision in your compositions. You are right, though. She is lit perfectly in all of the images. I would love to see her with a dark background even if that requires a studio.

Brev00 wrote:
Slightly altering that famous saying: Background, background, background. By shooting against so much white you created a high key type look which, to my eye, creates a distraction from your beautiful model with her fair skin and blonde hair. Bright tones tend to focus our attention. The high key effect can be very nice, don't get me wrong, but, I think it works best when there is a certain shapeliness to the lines and a light texture in the whites. Instead of consciously realized order, we have a sense of randomness to the first four pictures. The blurred buildings are also not contributing to the image, I don't think. My suggestion would be to find a background that offers as few distractions to her as possible. Like the last image. The greens complement her colors with a smooth, monochromatic feel that balances the complexity of her clothing and the fine detail you captured. The red wine introduces a nice, dark element that contrasts nicely with the pastels. Of course, variety is the spice so you don't want to repeat this particular shot. But, I think the principles are sound: the use of opposites to create a complementary relationship between the model and the background in tone, texture, complexity, and color. Notice the use of the rule of thirds in the final image. The line of pink creates a nice low 'horizon' to the image and her hair echoes the frame and cascades along the left thirds line. Nice amount of negative space to her right. The first four lack such composition order to my way of seeing. You don't need to use the third's approach but I would like to see more intentional precision in your compositions. You are right, though. She is lit perfectly in all of the images. I would love to see her with a dark background even if that requires a studio....Show more →

Thanks for the great insight! I will definitely be thinking of these things the next outing!

I would say that if you want to make photograph that look like everyone elses then the ROTs is the way to go. Everyone else is doing it but I would recommend when it comes to composition to listen to a few of these really great photographers instead.

Jay gets to it near the end. Just click on the blue watch on vimeo

"When subject matter is forced to fit into preconceived patterns, there can be no freshness of vision. Following rules of composition can only lead to a tedious repetition of pictorial cliches." - Edward Weston

"There are no rules and regulations for perfect composition. If there were we would be able to put all the information into a computer and would come out with a masterpiece. We know that's impossible. You have to compose by the seat of your pants." - Arnold Newman

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs." - Ansel Adams

"And in not learning the rules, I was free. I always say, you're either defined by the medium or you redefine the medium in terms of your needs." - Duane Michals

"There are no shortcuts, no rules." - Paul Strand

"Photography is not a sport. It has no rules. Everything must be dared and tried!" - Bill Brandt

"I came from the outside, the rules of photography didn't interest me... "-William Klein "

...... a photograph can look any way. Or, there's no way a photograph has to look (beyond being an illusion of a literal description). Or, there are no external or abstract or preconceived rules of design that can apply to still photographs. " Garry Winogrand

and maybe my favorite
"......so called “composition” becomes a personal thing, to be developed along with technique, as a personal way of seeing." - Edward Weston

airfrogusmc wrote:
I would say that if you want to make photograph that look like everyone elses then the ROTs is the way to go. Everyone else is doing it but I would recommend when it comes to composition to listen to a few of these really great photographers instead.

Jay gets to it near the end. Just click on the blue watch on vimeo

"When subject matter is forced to fit into preconceived patterns, there can be no freshness of vision. Following rules of composition can only lead to a tedious repetition of pictorial cliches." - Edward Weston

"There are no rules and regulations for perfect composition. If there were we would be able to put all the information into a computer and would come out with a masterpiece. We know that's impossible. You have to compose by the seat of your pants." - Arnold Newman

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs." - Ansel Adams

"And in not learning the rules, I was free. I always say, you're either defined by the medium or you redefine the medium in terms of your needs." - Duane Michals

"There are no shortcuts, no rules." - Paul Strand

"Photography is not a sport. It has no rules. Everything must be dared and tried!" - Bill Brandt

"I came from the outside, the rules of photography didn't interest me... "-William Klein "

...... a photograph can look any way. Or, there's no way a photograph has to look (beyond being an illusion of a literal description). Or, there are no external or abstract or preconceived rules of design that can apply to still photographs. " Garry Winogrand

and maybe my favorite
"......so called “composition” becomes a personal thing, to be developed along with technique, as a personal way of seeing." - Edward Weston...Show more →

thanks...and great video! Funny thing, a few weeks back I entered a photo in our local photography club’s print competition. I purposely broke about every rule one could. We had 3 well respected judges that all have great photography careers (and whose opinions I hold in high regard). My photo didn’t place because it didn’t technically meet many of the requirements, or rules they were looking for, but it was the one photo everyone, including the judges, kept going back to. They would not put it down. So maybe it wasn’t technically the best, but it definitely had the most impact that night! That being said, I am always looking for ways to improve; primarily to create more “impact”. So much of the time, being aware of technical rules enhance the photo’s impact. Other times, it’s knowingly breaking those rules that set your work apart! In the end, I shoot what I like, the way I like, but always am open to critique so that I may grow and become better, while finding what makes my work unique. All that said...I’ve got a long road ahead!!!

My advice is start thinking in terms of bodies of work instead of single images. Turn to what the greats all did. They all worked in projects and bodies of work and developed, as Weston eluded to, their own personal way of seeing by finding and following their own was of composing. That was complimented by the way they exposed and processed. All part of a larger whole.

I think it was Ernst Haas that said he would rather make crappy photos that looked like his photo than pretty picture that looked like everyone else pretty pictures. I think one of the biggest compliments a photographer can get is someone can recognize a certain photographers photographs before they see the signature.